[top-posting because it seems to be the most readable in this case -
what's the convention on this list?  top-post or bottom post?]

Thanks for the feedback and the links I'll check them out later.

Unfortunately I find myself in the situation where some colleagues of
mine want to/need to use Typolight and I need to provide a server for
that.  The problem is that Typolight not only requires libmcrypt which
I could get from either EPEL or RPMforge but it also requires PHP 5.2
which Red Hat doesn't ship and which I can't find in either EPEL or
RPMforge.

I don't have the time or resources to start building PHP packages (and
especially tracking bug and security fixes myself) in addition to the
fact that I don't fancy the idea of replacing essential packages with
non-supported ones.

Guess my best option os to raise this with RH support and see if they
can provide a way for us to run Typolight on RHEL5.3.

Again thanks for the effort maintaining this repo and the feedback to
my questions.

Regards

Bram

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:31 AM, Michael Mansour<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> I've decided much earlier..  Since EPEL does not play nice with
>> others, to me EPEL simply does not exists. It's harsh, yes..  It's
>> my choice.
>
> I agree with you as that choice can be made easily for some, yet some others
> it's not as easy.
>
> I read the links below and although it seemed obvious to me (and anyone else
> who'd read the thread) what should be done and what Dag / Axel were trying to
> do, it seems to me the EPEL people _chose_ not to see it that way.
>
> After all, if you work off a philosophy of "one repo should provide all
> packages not part of core" then you'll see it the EPEL way too.
>
> In the real world though, working with people typically wins over isolating
> yourself and not working with people.
>
> In the end, EPEL lose, 3rd party repo's lose, and eventually we do to.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael.
>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Bram Mertens wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi
>> >>
>> >> First of all thank you for providing this repository.
>> >>
>> >> Today I was looking for packages for libmcrypt and found one both in
>> >> RPMforge and in EPEL.
>> >>
>> >> I haven't compared the source packages of EPEL and the one from
>> >> RPMforge but I suspect there will be only minor differences.
>> >>
>> >> So to me seems like a duplication of effort and resources that might
>> >> be invested better in other matters as I'm sure you will all have
>> >> limited time and resources.
>> >>
>> >> Are there any plans to cooperate with the maintainers of the EPEL
>> >> repository?  I read about the conflict with fedora.us and livna.org
>> >> but nohing about EPEL.  And my quick search in the archives of the
>> >> last couple of months did not reveal anything like this either.
>> >>
>> >
>> > fwiw:
>> > http://www.google.com/search?q=epel+rpmforge+site%3Awww.redhat.com
>> > http://www.google.com/search?q=epel+rpmforge+site%3Alists.rpmforge.net
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Nicolas
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > users mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users
>> >
> ------- End of Original Message -------
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users
>
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to